About your Search

20120901
20120930
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
, two of the three organizations testifying today did not exist. and the third, the f.b.i., was a very different organization than it is today. focused on domestic crime as it had been for quite a while. obviously in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on america of 9/11, 2001, congress and the executive branch created the department of homeland security and then pursuant to the 9/11 commission recommendation created the national counterterrorism center. the f.b.i. essentially recreated itself into a first rate domestic counterterrorism intelligence agency. in addition to carrying out all its other responsibilities. in his absence we should thank director mueller for what i think is an extraordinary job he's done in overseeing this historic transformation and to thank the two of you, secretary napolitano, and director olsen, for what you have done together these changes represent the most significant reforms of america's national security organizations since the 1940's, at the beginning of the cold war. it's not coincidental since after 9/11 we understood we were facing a very diffe
came during a hearing on u.s. security threats. janet napolitano and the fbi associate director also testified. this is an hour and 50 minutes. >> the hearing will come to order. good morning to all. this is our annual, our committee's annual home lapd threat assessment hearing -- homeland threat assessment hearing. i want to welcome back janet napolitano, secretary of department of homeland security, and matt olsen, and the associate deputy director, kevin perkins, who is standing in for director bob mueller today. the director had to undergo unexpected surgery resulting from complications associated with recent dental treatment. he's unable to join us today. but we welcome mr. perkins in his stead. we with confidence we extend best regards to the director for a speedy recovery. this will be the final time that i have the privilege of chairing this annual hearing, so i want to use this opportunity to thank each of you for your leadership in our nation's homeland security and counterterrorism efforts through you to thank those who work with you in each of your departments or agencies
, is that on september 11, 2001, two of the three organizations testifying today did not exist. and the third, the f.b.i., was a very different organization than it is today. focused on domestic crime as it had been for quite a while. obviously in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on america of 9/11, 2001, congress and the executive branch created the department of homeland security and then pursuant to the 9/11 commission recommendation created the national counterterrorism center. the f.b.i. essentially recreated itself into a first rate domestic counterterrorism intelligence agency. in addition to carrying out all its other responsibilities. in his absence we should thank director mueller for what i think is an extraordinary job he's done in overseeing this historic transformation and to thank the two of you, secretary napolitano, and director olsen, for what you have done together these changes represent the most significant reforms of america's national security organizations since the 1940's, at the beginning of the cold war. sinceot coincidental after 9/11 we understood we were facing a very
that was not enough to warrant an investigation. there was nothing the fbi could point to which would single him out for special investigation or attention. was this an intelligence failure in wisconsin? >do you think there could have been things done to prevent this attack that were not done? >> i think the fbi late at where the problem was. they're really good at investigating after the fact, after things happen, but we had a delicate balance between people's constitutional right to assemble and express their speech, however weil, but we also have to be board cleaning and look at ideologies that have long histories of -- forward- looking and the ideologies that have long histories of spawning violence. i'm not talking about doing covert operations and people with extremist police, but i think it is important we have an overt monitoring police system on what is causing people to act of violence may. was this an intelligence failure? i do not think it is. but one thing the department of homeland security and the fbi could have done -- where was the warning the that sikhs and muslims have been victim
took place in our office about four weeks ago, which the fbi is continuing to investigate as an act of domestic terrorism. i would like to mention the investigating agencies and professional and -- professional and very helpful. i am not sure the gravity of what happened or almost happened on august 15 was fully captured in the reporting immediately following the event. more importantly, i think this is a moment for all of us to understand the responsibility we have as we advocate for causes to which we are all committed. when the shooter entered our building at approximately 10:45 a.m., he placed his backpack down in front of the security desk. leo was temporarily manning that desk. leo thought to assist him, and the assailants reached into his backpack and pulled out a 9 millimeter pistol. in the ensuing few seconds, three rounds were fired. as the fbi has reconstructed it, the first bullet, which struck the elevator control panel in the lobby, was just a few inches above leo's head as he ducked. uck, e not remembered to deat he would have been struck right in the head. the second
yesterday, or he would need to virtually eliminate the rest of the government. transportation, security, f.b.i., education, scientific research, food testing. we know we know that's not going to happen. the larger point is this. in terms of deficit reduction, the ryan plan -- there's no other way to state it -- a fraud. this should come as no surprise. after all, congressman ryan supported the bush policies that got us into this deep fiscal hole in the first place. from the bush tax cut to two unfunded wars to the paid-for creation of medicare part-d, congressman ryan's fingerprints are all easer th over the big-sg bush policies. ryan voted against the simpson-bowles framework. when paul ryan had a chance to walk the walk on deficit reduction, he joined all the other house republicans on the commission in voting down the report. he urged speaker boehner to abandon the grand bargain talks with president obama. "the new york times" reported in 2011, "ryan appealed to representative cantor to cut off negotiations between the speaker and the white house because he didn't feel the terms of the emer
, mr. speaker, who served in the f.b.i. and federal prosecutors and in the military, they support it. the democrat-led house passed this bill in 2008 with former speaker pelosi giving a glowing speech extolling the virtues of the underlying bill and excourting her colleagues about the necessity of passing it. and all of this happened, mr. speaker, because intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselves. it happened, mr. speaker, because this bill has nothing to do with americans on american soil. it happened in the past, mr. speaker. because this provides protections for americans who are traveling abroad. it passed because there is ample oversight. it passed because it has the needed checks and balances between the legislative branch and the executive branch and the judicial branch. so why the opposition, mr. speaker? how can you explain supporting something when ms. pelosi had the gavel but you can't support it when mr. boehner has the gavel? and what i want to do, mr. speaker, just for today, just for today is let's put down the red herrings and the straw argument
clip] >> there is an fbi investigation ongoing. we looked to that investigation to give us the definitive word as to what transpired. putting together the best information we have available to us today. our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo, which were prompted by the video. >> these territotraitors, the wy they acted, them choosing specific dates for this so- called demonstration, i think this leaves us with no doubt that this was preplanned, predetermined. host: here's the headline in the washington times -- on facebook, getting some of your comments on our questions on should the u.s. government control web content? an independent in pennsylvania, walid. caller: how are you? i think they should pull the video. host: why? caller: it's not about freedom of speech. we are supposed to have all these type of freedoms. by the same token, what are you seeing as far as cameras on everything? it's just free
heard from a friend of mine, fbi agent, the media does not think so. who is supposed to stand up for these guys? you know what i am staying? host: how do you think the administration handled libya? guest: let me just say, i have worked for both republican and democratic administrations. i really think that it is unfair to level such a criticism of president obama. he has been a very strong leader on protecting this country, as president bush was. both presidents have put the security of the american people as job number one, as they should. they have both been strong in that area, it is unfair. libya was a tragic event. ambassador stephens died two weeks ago today. the responsibility for guarding our embassies in conflict overseas, there is not an american military protecting our embassies. it is the host country that provides perimeter security around different establishments. so, let us down? in cairo? the egyptian government did not have enough security to run the embassy, which is why the crowd went over the wall. it was the libyans who led us down in been gauzy, when ambassa
of mine, fbi agent, the media does not think so. who is supposed to stand up for these guys? you know what i am staying? host: how do you think the administration handled libya? guest: let me just say, i have worked for both republican and democratic administrations. i really think that it is unfair to level such a criticism of president obama. he has been a very strong leader on protecting this country, as president bush was. both presidents have put the security of the american people as job number one, as they should. they have both been strong in that area, it is unfair. libya was a tragic event. ambassador stephens died two weeks ago today. the responsibility for guarding our embassies in conflict overseas, there is not an american military protecting our embassies. it is the host country that provides perimeter security around different establishments. so, let us down? in cairo? the egyptian government did not have enough security to run the embassy, which is why the crowd went over the wall. it was the libyans who led us down in been gauzy, when -- benghazi, when ambassador stevens
next year. i guarantee you. but doing it across the board, cuts into f.b.i., it cuts into our defense, it cuts into border patrol, it cuts into the basics and the heart of what we're doing and we cannot do that. the house passed a very specific plan for dealing with this last may. it is complete for us. now it's time for the senate to actually do their job and it's time for the president to send that out over to us. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: madam speaker, at this time i yield to a third gentleman from california, over here, the gentleman from california, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california four four -- r four minutes. >> thank you. thought i'd fool you. go to the left. it fools a lot of people. mr. speaker, i rise in support obviously of h.r. 6365, the national security and job protection act. do we need any more evidence that recent events in egypt and libya, than to oppose these d
, mr. speaker, who served in the f.b.i. and federal prosecutors and in the military, they support it. e democrat-led house passed this bill in 2008 with former speaker pelosi giving a glowing speech extolling the virtues of the underlying bill and excourting her colleagues about the necessity of passing it. and all of this happened, mr. speaker, because intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselve it happened, mr. speaker, because this bill has nothing to do with americans on american soil. it happened in the past, mr. speaker. because this provides protecons for americans who are traveling abroad. it passed because there is ple oversight. it passed because it has the needed checks and balances between the legislative branch and the executive branch and the judicial branch. so why the opposition, mr. speaker? how can you explain supporting something when ms. pelosi had the gavel but you can't support it when mr. boehner has the gavel? and what i want to do, mr. speaker, just for today, just for today is let's put down the red herrings and the straw arguments and the m
on defense. also on the f.b.i., on border security. you know what, we had a proposal to pay for part of that to prevent the sequester with the buffett rule and some other cuts. our republican colleagues talked about the terrible consequences of the cuts but they just don't want to pay for them. they don't want to ask the american people to contribute one more penny. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i've been thinking this is really mislabeled. why don't we call it the mitt romney rule act of 2012? he paid the return he indicated less than 15%. he earned many, many millions. he knew what the code now says. he could have sent some of the money that was not taxed to the government. all he had to do -- he could use a credit card. but he hasn't done that. so i mean this is mislabeled. it has nothing to do with mr. buffett. there's
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13